Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 3-D)

[arsonfilms]

Oddly enough, I'm a bit impressed that the actors' names are aligned correctly with their faces, which is more than you can say for most covers like this.

The order in which actors names appear depends on billing order set forth in production contracts. The only thing that makes this cover unique is that someone bothered to line up the actors in their billing order rather than just designing something interesting.

[HarryLong]

I guess lining up the actors in the correct order and designing something interesting is a mark of Genius!

[dx23]

[dx23]

[Antoine Doinel]

Why does Tech N9ne need to spell the rest of his name properly? Why not Tech9 or Tek9?

[dx23]

[colinr0380]

It looks as if that lady clumsily trod on the feet of those two guys when she pushed her way between them.

[codam]

[dx23]

[domino harvey]

God I hope no one ate that steak after having it impaled on a pool tool

[Cash Flagg]

At least they're honest about the producers' qualifications.

[nsps]

WB had decided it was going to go straight to DVD before the Sundance screening, and after critics got a chance to see it, it seems they made the right decision.

Yeah, it had apparently been sitting on the shelf for a while before they decided to do a Sundance rollout on the way to a DVD release. It already had Warner's direct-to-video Warner Premier label in front of it at the Sundance screening. I didn't know what WP was, and was wondering if they'd rebranded WI or something.

Worse films have received theatrical releases, but this one is no loss for the cinemas.

[dx23]

[Antoine Doinel]

Is it wrong that I'm kind of curious to see how they're going to score on regulation size nets?

EDIT: The answer disappointingly appears to be, pass it to Rodman.

[Quot]

Is it wrong that I'm kind of curious to see how they're going to score on regulation size nets?

EDIT: The answer disappointingly appears to be, pass it to Rodman.

Based on his career stats, I'm still wondering how they're going to score...

[HerrSchreck]

Incredible.

[kaujot]

What year is that skyline supposed to be in? 1999?

[domino harvey]

It's the eye catching reminder of its Mud Turtle lineage that is going to be responsible for all those blind rentals in Blockbuster

[dx23]

[knives]

And they found Norm MacDonald, dead from embarrassment.

[Gregory]

Is the smallest dog supposed to be a leather daddy?

[dx23]

To me, the most ridiculous thing is how Fox is now using the Dr. Doolittle name as franchise, similar to National Lampoons or American Pie. The poor doctor is not even a character anymore.

[colinr0380]

To me, the most ridiculous thing is how Fox is now using the Dr. Dolittle name as franchise, similar to National Lampoons or American Pie. The poor doctor is not even a character anymore.

I thought that already happened with the third one, where it was Dr Dolittle's teen daughter doing the talking to the animals? Another example of the ruthlessness of the movie biz I guess - of course we all knew that the only reason to see the films was for the talking animals so they've just cut out the overly expensive middle man!

On doing some imdb 'research' into this title, I'm shocked to discover that Million Dollar Mutts is actually Dr Dolittle 5 (also known as A Tinsel Town Tail)! Films 3, 4 and 5 all feature Kyla Pratt as Dolittle's daughter (weirdly given the particular focus on dogs these later films appear to have she also featured in Hotel For Dogs around the same time) promoted to the lead in the absence of Eddie Murphy, and four and five are straight to video films.

The fourth film where the young lady Dolittle is apparently recruited by the US President (played by Peter Coyote! ) also goes by a number of excrutiating punning subtitles such as First Dog and Tail To The Chief! #-o

(Though I did like the Argentinian subtitle: Perro presidencial, which raises the prospect of bilingual dogs working in international diplomatic circles!)

[flyonthewall2983]

So I guess you could say he's doing even less than little now.

[colinr0380]

Yes, Murphy's gone from one extreme to the other - from playing all the characters in a film with the aid of prosthetics to the presumably less taxing role of playing none of them!